If this is your first visit, be sure to check out our Posting Rules. You will have to register before you can post.
Anyone found posting offensive material will be banned and the police may be notified. Help us keep these message boards an enjoyable place to visit by clicking the Report Abuse button if you see offensive content.

The opposition need a coalition, only way, has been that way for some time, but a real coalition where values/principles align in more than just a power grab way as per Tories/Dems coalition.

Sad thing is this is already turning into a rather superficial perception Corbyn bashing exercise quickly, 'not fit to lead' etc whereas as May and her party's ultimate power play to go unchallenged in what it wants to do going forward, is being viewed as some sort of positive by comparison and she somehow is fit to lead the country (despite in the last year contradicting herself horribly on major massive issues for the UK, this election call included).

I'd rather Corbyn, a brick with lipstick, some jelly, an ice cube, 'Ants in my eyes Johnson', anything but May is preferable and any of them fitter to run this country than May and this all out unchecked drive for power they'll have going forward

What is interesting is the psychology posters here are demonstrating. A large percentage are clearly not Tory supporters and yet are attacking Corbyn rather than May and the destructive policies of the Conservatives.

I find that astonishing. The Thatcherite policies that have decimated this country will be heading our way again. Our children and grandchildren will pay the price and rather then be activated to stop this instead they are doing the bidding of the press and attacking the opposition on 'personality' of leader.

The only reason you could possibly think Corbyn is arrogant is from what you have seen through the media filters. You don't know Corbyn never met him and you perhaps should ask yourself if you can trust media image? maybe it's been shaped for a reason?

I don't need to meet a politician in order to get an idea of who they are.

I have never met Donald Trump either, but I'm quite certain he's a repulsive human being.

I don't need to meet a politician in order to get an idea of who they are.

I have never met Donald Trump either, but I'm quite certain he's a repulsive human being.

I would suggest that somebody like Corbyn, hasn't been in the public eye for very long to assume you believe he's arrogant is a little 'thin' in terms of being able to support that. The media shapes image very well and often delivers what it wishes.

However my next question would be so what if he is? You don't think May is arrogant? I couldn't imagine a more arrogant Prime Minister with her nonsensical Brexit Means Brexit, no early election and then expecting the population to just shut and an accept she can do what she likes and say what she likes.

Now personally I don't know her so i'll refrain from definitely labelling her arrogant. Maybe it is an act? However the UK has been destroyed by Thatherite policies. So a question of arrogance isn't important. That's personality and the leader of a nation doesn't have been a great personality.

Do you want another set of Thatcherite policies to further dismantle the UK? Which leader has a nicer personality is hardly even important.

What is interesting is the psychology posters here are demonstrating. A large percentage are clearly not Tory supporters and yet are attacking Corbyn rather than May and the destructive policies of the Conservatives.

I find that astonishing. The Thatcherite policies that have decimated this country will be heading our way again. Our children and grandchildren will pay the price and rather then be activated to stop this instead they are doing the bidding of the press and attacking the opposition on 'personality' of leader.

It's absolutely astonishing.

Yeah it also puzzles me how much the Tories get away with. They only have to mutter the word economy and people think all is well because they're supposed to be the party better for the economy. Cameron's favourite answer to any question was 'The economy is growing, the defecit is down'. They just get away with cuts to the poor and austerity it's a joke.

I would suggest that somebody like Corbyn, hasn't been in the public eye for very long to assume you believe he's arrogant is a little 'thin' in terms of being able to support that. The media shapes image very well and often delivers what it wishes.

He's been a MP for nearly my entire lifespan. That's plenty of time in the public eye.

However my next question would be so what if he is? You don't think May is arrogant? I couldn't imagine a more arrogant Prime Minister with her nonsensical Brexit Means Brexit, no early election and then expecting the population to just shut and an accept she can do what she likes and say what she likes.

Now personally I don't know her so i'll refrain from definitely labelling her arrogant. Maybe it is an act? However the UK has been destroyed by Thatherite policies. So a question of arrogance isn't important. That's personality and the leader of a nation doesn't have been a great personality.

Do you want another set of Thatcherite policies to further dismantle the UK? Which leader has a nicer personality is hardly even important.

Yeah it also puzzles me how much the Tories get away with. They only have to mutter the word economy and people think all is well because they're supposed to be the party better for the economy. Cameron's favourite answer to any question was 'The economy is growing, the defecit is down'. They just get away with cuts to the poor and austerity it's a joke.

The International Monetary Fund said 'austerity' was the way to go. That was despite advice to the contrary of many of its own economists. Now most of Europe simply did what the IMF said. That's worrying in itself that the IMF actually tells government what to do which is the only conclusion from a universal acceptance of a policy that has never worked in history.

Now contracting your economy, cutting investment, cutting services has never worked in growing the economy in any nation in history. It was no surprise when the IMF came out and admitted that it hasn't worked in a single country that adopted it. The only logical conclusion is it was never meant to work. They knew it wouldn't work, it didn't, it never has worked and yet Conservatives enjoy the position of being scene as the economic party despite no success economically.

Thatcherism and Reaganomics are given these names because no sane economist would have ever believed they were possible. Both have devastated the UK and US economies. However the press help them frame with with polls, stats, GDP and all of it simply fake news. However they support preconceived positions.

He's been a MP for nearly my entire lifespan. That's plenty of time in the public eye.

I'm not voting for her party either.

Tell me when the media first started covering Corbyn and the amount of time you spent watching him, listening to him and seeing his public image. The fact he's been an MP for that long are you suggesting you have watched Corbyn in depth your entire life?

If not then he hasn't been in the public eye your entire life. So please explain your in depth personal knowledge of a man who for many years was to the larger population not known despite being an MP.

I certainly understand your position not voting Conservative. The Conservatives have one real threat which is Labour and unusually for once Labour has a 'social-ish' style leader. Now the personality campaign against him, the in fighting rounding on him. Doesn't part of you consider this is planned because he is opponent the Tories fear most?

Historically you don't usually attack somebody unless you are fearful.

What is interesting is the psychology posters here are demonstrating. A large percentage are clearly not Tory supporters and yet are attacking Corbyn rather than May and the destructive policies of the Conservatives.

I find that astonishing. The Thatcherite policies that have decimated this country will be heading our way again. Our children and grandchildren will pay the price and rather then be activated to stop this instead they are doing the bidding of the press and attacking the opposition on 'personality' of leader.

It's absolutely astonishing.

Agree Coach, I do find it baffling but not overly surprising sadly.

We have a leader of a party who is open to question like anyone, but the comparisons are remarkable as in he isn't apparently fit to lead yet May's very clear and dangerous thinly veiled drive for a remarkable amount of unchecked power is meekly and quite numbly accepted.... 'cos she is acting like a leader' (despite dramatic u-turns right there in front of everyone during her short time in power which she got through being quite a weak opportunist on the sidelines waiting)

We have a leader of a party who is open to question like anyone, but the comparisons are remarkable as in he isn't apparently fit to lead yet May's very clear and dangerous thinly veiled drive for a remarkable amount of unchecked power is meekly and quite numbly accepted.... 'cos she is acting like a leader' (despite dramatic u-turns right there in front of everyone during her short time in power which she got through being quite a weak opportunist on the sidelines waiting)

It's a very interesting mentality. I have spoken here and you have openly disagreed about the communist nature of our education system. That it is simply not about education but conformity. I'm a firm believer that conformity and the massive increase in pressure to conform has led to the rise of bullying. Both in schools for children and in the workplace.

Bullying is at an all time high, it is like an epidemic. For me the media has long shaped what we believe a leader should conform to. They have delivered two opposite conformist choices. Firstly a strong, tough decision making, no nonsense authoritarian. That's their description callous, cold, cruel could just as easily describe the same person.

However then you have the 'alternative' conformist image of what our 'leader' (note I don't believe leader is the right word that assumes we are sheep to be led) when in actual fact we should be saying head civil servant but the alternative is the progressive. Younger, more likeable, forward thinking, better looking, cooler to appeal to the younger generation and the stoic stronger older statesman/woman as the opposite.

Anybody that doesn't fit that idea or conform is attacked. Like bullying, it is simply a product of a society that has been taught to attack anything that doesn't conform to the preconceived image you have been given of what a person should be like.

You saw with Thatcher/Reagan even Trump this 'strong' image being pushed despite the fact they will bring destruction. People like Bill Clinton, Blair and Cameron and Obama fill the other conformist ideal. You do have some wacky wildcards like Boy Bush and Boris Johnson who are 'eccentric' or some say laughable but they're rich and powerful so that's ok. They'd be destroyed if there were one of the masses in the media.

In any case if you create a conformist society and you tell them what a 'leader' (that word again) looks like they almost react without the ability to rationalise. He cam't win, he doesn't look like how I expect, he doesn't sound how I expect, and the press and population round upon that person.

May wasn't elected. She's lied openly. Yet she's considered material even from those opposed to the Conservatives. Manufacturing consent it appears when a society is conformist is more real and more powerful than witchcraft.

It puts a spell on people and people start attacking those that don't conform and then rationalise it by saying he's arrogant or similar. More arrogant than Cameron? Blair? May? It is really just an exercise in conformity and attacking something that doesn't conform.

Labour has a social-ish leader, one that wants to be a civil servant rather than make the public do what he wants. That doesn't fit what people have been taught so they reject even above the idea of rejecting another set of Thaterite policies that would destroy the nation.

That is the choice available. A set of cuts, policies that will devastate the nation for our grandchildren or vote for a Labour leader that doesn't fit our idea of what we have been taught a leader should look like.

Amazingly on these boards there is so much passion against the Conservatives and their policies, which is to be applauded, but more for attacking the leader of the one party that can stop them and that is something I understand because I get the power of manufacturing consent.

Make your choice though.......................... a leader you don't personally like or one that will devastate the country?

It's a very interesting mentality. I have spoken here and you have openly disagreed about the communist nature of our education system. That it is simply not about education but conformity. I'm a firm believer that conformity and the massive increase in pressure to conform has led to the rise of bullying. Both in schools for children and in the workplace.

Bullying is at an all time high, it is like an epidemic. For me the media has long shaped what we believe a leader should conform to. They have delivered two opposite conformist choices. Firstly a strong, tough decision making, no nonsense authoritarian. That's their description callous, cold, cruel could just as easily describe the same person.

However then you have the 'alternative' conformist image of what our 'leader' (note I don't believe leader is the right word that assumes we are sheep to be led) when in actual fact we should be saying head civil servant but the alternative is the progressive. Younger, more likeable, forward thinking, better looking, cooler to appeal to the younger generation and the stoic stronger older statesman/woman as the opposite.

Anybody that doesn't fit that idea or conform is attacked. Like bullying, it is simply a product of a society that has been taught to attack anything that doesn't conform to the preconceived image you have been given of what a person should be like.

You saw with Thatcher/Reagan even Trump this 'strong' image being pushed despite the fact they will bring destruction. People like Bill Clinton, Blair and Cameron and Obama fill the other conformist ideal. You do have some wacky wildcards like Boy Bush and Boris Johnson who are 'eccentric' or some say laughable but they're rich and powerful so that's ok. They'd be destroyed if there were one of the masses in the media.

In any case if you create a conformist society and you tell them what a 'leader' (that word again) looks like they almost react without the ability to rationalise. He cam't win, he doesn't look like how I expect, he doesn't sound how I expect, and the press and population round upon that person.

May wasn't elected. She's lied openly. Yet she's considered material even from those opposed to the Conservatives. Manufacturing consent it appears when a society is conformist is more real and more powerful than witchcraft.

It puts a spell on people and people start attacking those that don't conform and then rationalise it by saying he's arrogant or similar. More arrogant than Cameron? Blair? May? It is really just an exercise in conformity and attacking something that doesn't conform.

Labour has a social-ish leader, one that wants to be a civil servant rather than make the public do what he wants. That doesn't fit what people have been taught so they reject even above the idea of rejecting another set of Thaterite policies that would destroy the nation.

That is the choice available. A set of cuts, policies that will devastate the nation for our grandchildren or vote for a Labour leader that doesn't fit our idea of what we have been taught a leader should look like.

Amazingly on these boards there is so much passion against the Conservatives and their policies, which is to be applauded, but more for attacking the leader of the one party that can stop them and that is something I understand because I get the power of manufacturing consent.

make your choice though a leader you don't personally like or one that will devastate the country.........acting strong.

The opposition need a coalition, only way, has been that way for some time, but a real coalition where values/principles align in more than just a power grab way as per Tories/Dems coalition.

Sad thing is this is already turning into a rather superficial perception Corbyn bashing exercise quickly, 'not fit to lead' etc whereas as May and her party's ultimate power play to go unchallenged in what it wants to do going forward, is being viewed as some sort of positive by comparison and she somehow is fit to lead the country (despite in the last year contradicting herself horribly on major massive issues for the UK, this election call included).

I'd rather Corbyn, a brick with lipstick, some jelly, an ice cube, 'Ants in my eyes Johnson', anything but May is preferable and any of them fitter to run this country than May and this all out unchecked drive for power they'll have going forward

If they lose and Corbyn doesn't step down, Labour will be finished for years and years.

What about if he does step down and an equally divisive figure succeeds Jeremy? As Labour may keep going down the same route of having another Corbynite who doesn't have the necessary skills/policies to inspire the centralists/right wing of the party.

However, if they swing too far to the centre ground, there may be a similar situation to Kinnock who tried to drag the party to the centre. However, was hampered by the militant left. I believe this was used by Thatcher, the two Davids and especially Major to gain relative electoral success. As for the 92 election was probably a case of the nation was not yet prepared to give the running of the country to Labour as opposed to were still content for the Conservatives to run the country.

What is interesting is the psychology posters here are demonstrating. A large percentage are clearly not Tory supporters and yet are attacking Corbyn rather than May and the destructive policies of the Conservatives.

I find that astonishing. The Thatcherite policies that have decimated this country will be heading our way again. Our children and grandchildren will pay the price and rather then be activated to stop this instead they are doing the bidding of the press and attacking the opposition on 'personality' of leader.

It's absolutely astonishing.

It just shows you gthe mindset of those who allows other to do their thinking for them reall idiots,but in real politic terms,this is the biggest own goal since cameron brexit referundum,all the lazy people who in the past choose to stay at home and moan about everything,well this is yr chance to shove it up mays face,come on people we can do this.

Could a poll be set up to gauge the popularity of parties on the forum?

Potentially meaningless due to the same reason as the pollsters tend to get a margin of error/polls wrong. I doubt it will even be close to representative for the country.

Shy Tories will probably not advertise here and one thing that one polling organisation has been able to do to is ask various aspirational, personal values, etc questions to gauge the people they are polling and are more able to predict the answer to who that person will vote for as opposed to what they claim they will vote for.

Potentially meaningless due to the same reason as the pollsters tend to get a margin of error/polls wrong. I doubt it will even be close to representative for the country.

Shy Tories will probably not advertise here and one thing that one polling organisation has been able to do to is ask various aspirational, personal values, etc questions to gauge the people they are polling and are more able to predict the answer to who that person will vote for as opposed to what they claim they will vote for.

I don't think anyone will come on here see a poll and think it represents the whole of Great Britain, it would just be interesting to see people's votes especially for parties that aren't Conservative/Labour. Trying to guess who people will vote for by things like that could be quite disastrous as people can change their minds or just stay loyal to a party or even use tactical voting.

I get what you are saying but this is quickly becoming a default bit of reasoning, better of two evils, best of a bad bunch etc but this all out power grab is in my view very dangerous and potentially damning for the UK and the future....so to my mind is almost the worst of a bad bunch, beaten only to the title of worst by the BNP

E.g. the hot topic in the previous election due to the Lib Dem promise - Tuition Fees.

Should the UK abolish University Tuition Fees
Yes
No
Yes but only when the student is studying in fields of high job demand
Yes and replace it with a Graduate Tax
Yes but only for Low Income Families.
No but they should be reduced.
Yes but only for UK Students.
Add your own stance.

Speaking of Polls, how are any of them representative? Bloomberg saying it's looking good for May, quoting a poll from YouGov of a sample of 2000 people. The next 2000 people could show a swing in the opposite direction.

Speaking of Polls, how are any of them representative? Bloomberg saying it's looking good for May, quoting a poll from YouGov of a sample of 2000 people. The next 2000 people could show a swing in the opposite direction.

I think polls lead and mislead voters, even drive voters as discussed on the other thread...... plus people are less likely to say out loud they voted the Tories for example as part of a poll....but when it comes to submitting the vote...bang, the real stuff counts not what voters thought others wanted to hear at the time

Speaking of Polls, how are any of them representative? Bloomberg saying it's looking good for May, quoting a poll from YouGov of a sample of 2000 people. The next 2000 people could show a swing in the opposite direction.

The way they do their polls is contact 2000 people from ultra safe and marginal seats along with inner city to rural seats so they have the full spectrum of people. Some will ask various questions before asking the main question to gauge whether the person is mis-reporting or their mind is more made up than it actually it is.

The way they do their polls is contact 2000 people from ultra safe and marginal seats along with inner city to rural seats so they have the full spectrum of people. Some will ask various questions before asking the main question to gauge whether the person is mis-reporting or their mind is more made up than it actually it is.

Yeah but still even if you ask people from all areas, you're getting tiny representations. Who intprets whether someone is mis-reporting? What if their views are clouding their judgement of how people have answered questions. There are too many variables to try and guess what the country is going to do. I honestly thought that remain would win. I didn't think Trump would win. Neither did the polls, it's just so unpredictable.

I will be voting Conservative as I always do. I do however have serious reservations about a potentially un-checked government in power, should they win. I am very much centre-right and believe that any sitting government needs a strong opposition in order to keep things balanced. Should they lose the election, I feel that Labour and the left will need to form some sort of broad coalition in order to reign in any potential Tory excesses.

I get what you are saying but this is quickly becoming a default bit of reasoning, better of two evils, best of a bad bunch etc but this all out power grab is in my view very dangerous and potentially damning for the UK and the future....so to my mind is almost the worst of a bad bunch, beaten only to the title of worst by the BNP

Truth is Welshy - we need new, a new left - a new central and a new right - today politics is out of touch

Labour is a tarnished hot potato
Conservatives have no challenge
Libs Dems are a joke

Speaking of Polls, how are any of them representative? Bloomberg saying it's looking good for May, quoting a poll from YouGov of a sample of 2000 people. The next 2000 people could show a swing in the opposite direction.